November 2019 at Air Force Courts-Martial: 21 Cases
The Air Force tried 21 courts-martial in November 2019, and only 2 ended in a full acquittal (10%), compared with 21% for the Air Force in all of 2019. Of 16 convicted enlisted members, 11 received a punitive discharge (69%), compared with 57% for the year.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 5 min read
Trends › By Year › November 2019
Short answer: The Air Force tried 21 courts-martial in November 2019, and only 2 ended in a full acquittal (10%), compared with 21% for the Air Force in all of 2019. Of 16 convicted enlisted members, 11 received a punitive discharge (69%), compared with 57% for the year. The median confinement was 4 months, the same as the annual median.
Most Cases Ended in a Conviction
Only 2 of the month's 21 cases ended in a full acquittal, meaning not guilty of all charges. That rate of 10% is lower than the 21% across the service for 2019. The other 19 cases ended in a conviction on at least one charge.
The rate counts all cases, not contested ones only. Air Force records from 2016 to 2019 rarely list the plea when the accused pleaded guilty, so the number of contested cases this month cannot be separated out.
Punitive Discharges Were More Common
For enlisted members, a punitive discharge is a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge. Of 16 convicted enlisted members, 11 received one: 8 bad-conduct discharges and 3 dishonorable discharges. The Air Force share for 2019 was 57%.
Of 3 convicted officers or warrant officers, 1 was dismissed. Dismissal is the officer equivalent of a punitive discharge. A member sentenced without one may still face administrative separation, which these records do not show.
Confinement Terms
Of 19 convictions, 17 included confinement. The median confinement was 4 months, the same as the Air Force median for the year. A quarter of terms were 2 years or more.
These figures are adjudged sentences, set at trial for every charge in a case. A plea-agreement cap, clemency, or an appeal can reduce them later. One sentence covers all charges in a case, so the records do not give a separate term for each offense.
Charges in a Renumbering Year
Charge lists cover 19 of the 21 cases, and each article counts once per case. Drug charges under Article 112a appeared in 9 (47%), close to the 51% for the year. Article 134, Article 128 (assault), and Article 92 (failure to obey an order or regulation) each appeared in 4 cases (21%). Across the service, assault was charged in 15% of cases and orders violations in 14%.
Article 120b, rape and sexual assault of a child, appeared in 3 cases (16%), compared with 7% for 2019. Article 120, rape and sexual assault, appeared in 2 (11%).
Some articles changed meaning in 2019. Article 115, covering malingering before 2019 and communicating threats since, appeared in 2 cases (11%), compared with 2% for the year. Article 130, housebreaking before 2019 and stalking since, appeared once. The records give trial dates, not offense dates, so they cannot show which version applied.
| UCMJ Article | Cases | Share here | Share, the Air Force for all of 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Art. 112a Wrongful use, possession of controlled substances | 9 | 47% | 51% |
| Art. 134 General article | 4 | 21% | 23% |
| Art. 128 Assault | 4 | 21% | 15% |
| Art. 92 Failure to obey order or regulation | 4 | 21% | 14% |
| Art. 120b Rape and sexual assault of a child | 3 | 16% | 7% |
| Art. 120 Rape and sexual assault | 2 | 11% | 8% |
| Art. 115 Malingering before 2019, communicating threats since | 2 | 11% | 2% |
| Art. 130 Housebreaking before 2019, stalking since | 1 | 5% | 0% |
Most Panels Were Officer Panels
The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt. A military judge alone decided 12 cases. Panels decided the others with a forum listed: 7 officer panels and 1 enlisted panel. Members decided 40% of cases, close to the 42% for the Air Force that year.
Records from this period rarely list guilty pleas. The data therefore cannot show how many judge-alone or panel cases were contested.
Rank and Court Level
The accused included 16 junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4), 4 officers or warrant officers, and 1 NCO (E-5 to E-9). That mix is more junior than the Air Force overall, where 68% were junior enlisted.
General courts-martial, which can impose long confinement and a dishonorable discharge, made up 57% of cases (12 of 21). Special courts-martial, capped at one year of confinement, made up the rest. Since 2019, a special court-martial can also be tried by a military judge alone, capped at six months with no punitive discharge.
Where the Cases Were Tried
Goodfellow AFB, Texas, tried 3 cases and Seymour Johnson AFB, North Carolina, tried 2. Offutt AFB, Nebraska, JBSA - Randolph, Texas, and Ramstein AB, Germany, tried 1 each. The five together accounted for 38% of the month's cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so a high count does not mean a base has a particular problem.
November 2018 Compared With November 2019
November 2018 had 33 cases; November 2019 had 21. Median confinement went from 2 months to 4 months. Punitive discharges for convicted enlisted members went from 59% to 69%. Convictions with confinement went from 83% to 89%. The general court-martial share went from 52% to 57%. Monthly groups this small can change with a few cases.
The records do not include evidence, plea terms, nonjudicial punishment, or administrative separations. Air Force records also rarely list charges after a full acquittal.
| November 2018 | November 2019 | |
|---|---|---|
| Cases | 33 | 21 |
| Contested (of pleas recorded) | — | — |
| Convictions with confinement | 83% | 89% |
| Median confinement | 2 months | 4 months |
| Punitive discharge (enlisted) | 59% | 69% |
| General courts-martial | 52% | 57% |
Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Air Force courts-martial with a trial date in November 2019 (21 cases), compared with the whole year.
Source: public court-martial records (Article 140a, UCMJ) in Military Trial Results, data updated October 24, 2026. Definitions, sources, and known gaps: how this data was built. Errors: content@bodiesburied.com.
Related Analysis
- Air Force Courts-Martial: Data and Trends (hub)
- By Year (hub)
- Air Force Courts-Martial, October 2019: The Month in Review (previous / next)
- December 2019 at Air Force Courts-Martial: 25 Cases (previous / next)
- Air Force Courts-Martial in 2019: Year in Review (the whole year)
- Air Force Courts-Martial, April 2018: The Month in Review
- Air Force Courts-Martial, April 2019: The Month in Review
- Air Force Courts-Martial, August 2018: The Month in Review
- Air Force Courts-Martial, August 2020: The Month in Review
- Search every case in Military Trial Results (members)
About the author. Jocelyn C. Stewart is a retired Army JAG with more than 24 years of trying courts-martial and more than 200 jury trials. She hosts Where All The Bodies Are Buried and runs the Law Office of Jocelyn C. Stewart. This analysis is for education and information only. It is not legal advice, and every case is different.